On Wed, 17 Oct 2012, Jens Axboe wrote:
> 1. redo_fd_request() races with tear-down of the disks, but because
> set_next_request() checks disk->queue before doing anything this was
> usually harmless. Now that do_floppy_init() doesn't clear disk->queue,
> the race condition is
On 2012-10-17 16:11, Jiri Kosina wrote:
> On Wed, 17 Oct 2012, Ben Hutchings wrote:
>
1. redo_fd_request() races with tear-down of the disks, but because
set_next_request() checks disk->queue before doing anything this was
usually harmless. Now that do_floppy_init() doesn't clear d
On Wed, 17 Oct 2012, Ben Hutchings wrote:
> > > 1. redo_fd_request() races with tear-down of the disks, but because
> > > set_next_request() checks disk->queue before doing anything this was
> > > usually harmless. Now that do_floppy_init() doesn't clear disk->queue,
> > > the race condition is m
On Fri, 2012-10-12 at 13:55 -0400, Sasha Levin wrote:
> Hi Ben,
>
> On Wed, Oct 10, 2012 at 11:52 AM, Ben Hutchings wrote:
> > On Tue, 2012-10-09 at 09:26 -0400, Sasha Levin wrote:
> >> On 10/09/2012 09:21 AM, Sasha Levin wrote:
> >> > On 10/08/2012 05:45 PM, Jiri Kosina wrote:
> >> >> On Mon, 8
On Fri, 2012-10-12 at 13:55 -0400, Sasha Levin wrote:
> Hi Ben,
>
> On Wed, Oct 10, 2012 at 11:52 AM, Ben Hutchings wrote:
> > On Tue, 2012-10-09 at 09:26 -0400, Sasha Levin wrote:
> >> On 10/09/2012 09:21 AM, Sasha Levin wrote:
> >> > On 10/08/2012 05:45 PM, Jiri Kosina wrote:
> >> >> On Mon, 8
Hi Ben,
On Wed, Oct 10, 2012 at 11:52 AM, Ben Hutchings wrote:
> On Tue, 2012-10-09 at 09:26 -0400, Sasha Levin wrote:
>> On 10/09/2012 09:21 AM, Sasha Levin wrote:
>> > On 10/08/2012 05:45 PM, Jiri Kosina wrote:
>> >> On Mon, 8 Oct 2012, Jan Kara wrote:
>> >>
>> >> I'm still seeing this on l
On Wed, 10 Oct 2012, Ben Hutchings wrote:
> > >> I'm still seeing this on linux-next.
> > I think this is floppy related (see redo_fd_request() in the stack
> > trace). And there were quite some changes to the area recently. Adding
> > maintainer to CC.
> > >> Hmm ... I don't
On Tue, 2012-10-09 at 09:26 -0400, Sasha Levin wrote:
> On 10/09/2012 09:21 AM, Sasha Levin wrote:
> > On 10/08/2012 05:45 PM, Jiri Kosina wrote:
> >> On Mon, 8 Oct 2012, Jan Kara wrote:
> >>
> >> I'm still seeing this on linux-next.
> I think this is floppy related (see redo_fd_request(
On 10/09/2012 09:21 AM, Sasha Levin wrote:
> On 10/08/2012 05:45 PM, Jiri Kosina wrote:
>> On Mon, 8 Oct 2012, Jan Kara wrote:
>>
>> I'm still seeing this on linux-next.
I think this is floppy related (see redo_fd_request() in the stack
trace). And there were quite some changes to t
On 10/08/2012 05:45 PM, Jiri Kosina wrote:
> On Mon, 8 Oct 2012, Jan Kara wrote:
>
>>> > > I'm still seeing this on linux-next.
>> > I think this is floppy related (see redo_fd_request() in the stack
>> > trace). And there were quite some changes to the area recently. Adding
>> > maintainer to C
On Mon, 8 Oct 2012, Jan Kara wrote:
> > I'm still seeing this on linux-next.
> I think this is floppy related (see redo_fd_request() in the stack
> trace). And there were quite some changes to the area recently. Adding
> maintainer to CC.
Hmm ... I don't immediately see how this is happening.
On Sun 07-10-12 14:26:42, Sasha Levin wrote:
> Ping?
>
> I'm still seeing this on linux-next.
I think this is floppy related (see redo_fd_request() in the stack
trace). And there were quite some changes to the area recently. Adding
maintainer to CC.
Ping?
I'm still seeing this on linux-next.
On Sat, Sep 22, 2012 at 4:35 PM, Sasha Levin wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> While fuzzing with trinity inside a KVM tools guest running the latest
> linux-next kernel, I've stumbled on the following BUG.
>
> I've also hit a similar trace where the 'BUG_ON(ELV_ON
Hi all,
While fuzzing with trinity inside a KVM tools guest running the latest
linux-next kernel, I've stumbled on the following BUG.
I've also hit a similar trace where the 'BUG_ON(ELV_ON_HASH(rq));' above that
list_del_init() gets hit, so I guess it's a race
condition of some sorts.
[9.
14 matches
Mail list logo
